Dear Amanda and Juris,

I'm interested in how you see that your analyses fit with the disciplines of
engineering design (mechanical, mechatronic, software, computing etc)? All
involve creativity, culturally-based organisations, economic development etc
and are closely linked with art and aesthetic except for  a short period in
the late 20th century. All regard design as a collaborative endeavour  vital
to new forms of capitalist enterprise. 

One aspect of the difference between professional practices in engineering
design fields and 'art and design' design  (and  this  may be fundamentally
important in terms of epistemological biases in research in this area) is
that engineering design outcomes are rarely associated with the individual
designers, and,  the huge amount of engineering design that is the primary
basis of most products is relatively hidden or (if designed sucessfully) so
unobtrusive as to be overlooked. For  example, there are very few poepl who
would know the name of the engineering designers that designed the engine
control system in their car or are  aware of the sophistication and
importance of that  computerised engine management system in environmental
terms? Another example is that it is usually not at the front of consumers
(or many designers ) minds that most of the design of popular devices such
as the iPod was undertaken by engineering designers.  Hence on one hand in
the engeering design realms, there are typically  'no stars' and on the
other hand 'the bulk of the design work is not seen by consumers/users' .

Does this imply a parallel and different process to the governmentality
explanations you have developed for 'art and design' design,  or is it
included in your explanations? 

Terry


-----Original Message-----
From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Juris
Milestone
Sent: Thursday, 5 June 2008 3:03 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Design-Art

Amanda,

Yes, in a recent article I briefly explored a related contradiction (between
'creative genius' and design-for-all) within the US popular media's handling
of the idea of design: "Design as Power: Paul Virilio and the
Governmentality of Design Expertise"
http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&issn=1473-5784&volume=48&i
ssue=2&spage=175

Basically, I say that in the media, at least, there is no perceived
contradiction or conflict between the two and I believe this is accomplished
largely through the pairing of the star system (famous designers or
architects) with the glorification of the consumer in contemporary
capitalist society (the 'democratization of design' is often invoked here as
well).  These two areas work together to form a kind of symbiosis between
market rules and the populace, thereby resolving the contradiction through a
neat interdependence, and ultimately contributing to the 'governing'
(organization) of modern liberal democratic societies/populations.

Juris


On Jun 3, 2008, at 4:16 PM, Bill, Amanda wrote:

> Hi Dan and Juris,
> I've investigated 'creativity'  as governmentality. Am just about to 
> submit my PhD thesis on it. I've taken it as a category of subjective 
> identification and an object of educational governance in fashion 
> design. From a discourse theory perspective (Laclau - Essex school), I 
> take 'creativity' is a nodal point that unifies previously 
> antagonistic views. Within various cultural organisations including 
> economic development agencies and universities, moves to strengthen a 
> liberal agenda and retain creativity as a form of 'arts knowledge' 
> with high cultural capital have been rubbing up against strategies to 
> enlist and develop more universal concepts about creativity as a 
> collaborative endeavour, vital to new forms of capitalist enterprise.
> An outcome of the resulting creativity discourse is that the 'idea of 
> design' and the 'idea of art' tend to shift about, somewhat.
> You're right, this needs further examination.
>
> Amanda
> College of Creative Arts
> Massey University
> Wellington, NZ
>
> ________________________________________
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and 
> related research in Design [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
> Juris Milestone [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 3 June 2008 8:28 a.m.
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Design-Art
>
> Dan,
>
> This facet of design is, I think, under examined - that is, what the 
> 'idea of design' is outside of professional or academic claims, and 
> how this is important.  I think we ought to allow for an analysis of 
> this idea (design) as a "total social fact", along the lines of Mauss'
> gift, or a technology of governmentality along the lines of Foucault, 
> or class and taste along the lines of Bourdieu's field of position 
> takings.
>
> Design in mass media and consumer culture is a powerful force that is 
> shaped outside the purviews of professional designers, design 
> researchers, and other design academics, and yet has a huge influence 
> on those very areas.
>
> Juris Milestone
>
>
> On Jun 2, 2008, at 9:00 AM, Daniel Huppatz wrote:
>
>> Dear list
>>
>> There are always interesting discussions about the definitions of 
>> design on this list, and I thought list members might be interested 
>> in my recent mapping of contemporary design & consumerism. Outside of 
>> design education institutes and design studios, the meaning of the 
>> term design seems to me to be narrowing rather than expanding. Most 
>> recently, design seems to have become associated ever more closely 
>> with art - or Design-Art
>> - as discussed by Alice Rawthorn in the IHT here. I think this 
>> pheonomenon has serious implications for designers and the way design 
>> is perceived. I've blogged it here as part of an ongoing series of 
>> essays about contemporary design and consumerism, Signs of Design. 
>> Any comments or ideas from listees most welcome.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Dan Huppatz